1444 and Acol

[MickyB]

OK, give me an example of a problem that the weak notrump solves.

After an inverted minor raise, if 2N is NF you would like to do something else with 14, but 3N should show 18-19 (or not?). Having only one range for balanced hands that open one of a suit makes those things easier. I know you and Arend solve this problem by playing 14-16, but that means you have to rebid 2N with 17.

 

Also when considering a negative double you don't have to worry about opener having a weak notrump.

Agree with these, too - inverted minors are oh-so-simple playing weak NT, and it prevents the holding of a minimum 33(43) after 1m (2suit) X.

 

At this rate, I might find myself switching to weak NT...oh, wait, all these problems are solved by Polish Club too :P

[MickyB]

As for the poll question: The majority believes that 2N shows no extras here. The rule that

2N shows 15+ (forcing) if the response was below 2 of the opening suit

2N shows some 11-13(14) (?) non-forcing if the response was above 2 of the opening suit

 

seems sensible. Is this standard in the UK?

I've only ever seen it discussed occasionally, I suspect the majority would assume 2NT still showed a strong NT.

[Cascade]

Traditionally (and I'm sure many club players still play it this way) 1♠:2♣, 2♦ was NF, as was 1♠:2♣, 2NT (15-16). Amongst the tournament players, it's fairly standard for this to be forcing, but a lot of other things to be non-forcing -

 

1♠:2♣, 2♦:2♠, and most of opener's rebids over this too I suspect

We play this as non-forcing. But any rebid by opener would be forcing - both players have shown extra values.

 

1♠:2♣, 2♦:2NT

 

Non-Forcing for us.

 

1♠:2♣, 3♣

 

Non-Forcing for us.

 

1♠:2♣, 2♠:3♣

 

Non-Forcing for us.

 

If an unknown partner were to bid these with me, I'd have no idea if they were forcing -

1♠:2♣, 2♦:3♠

 

Forcing for us. (I think non-forcing is standard Acol but it doesn't make any sense to me to have two non-forcing spade bids below game and no way to set trumps and start a slam exploration.)

 

1♠:2♣, 3♣:3♠

 

Non-Forcing for us. We play 4♦ (other minor) artificially to agree the major and show a hand too good for 4♠.

[Cascade]

Easy: it solves the problem of what to open with a weak No Trump hand.

 

Hard: It is silly consider the advantages (or disadvantages) of a bid that is part of a system in isolation.  There are trade-offs in whatever you decide.

 

A weak NT has many trade-offs over opening those hands with a suit.  The specific advantages and disadvantages will vary depending on whether you can open a suit naturally or have to open a short (less than four-card) suit in a five-card major system.

I don't think I asked a silly question at all. Helene claims that the weak notrump solves many problems, so why is it silly to ask what problems she had in mind?

 

Your easy answer strikes as a hook on a pig (this one is for jdonn). Of course what to open with a weak notrump is not what most people consider a big problem in standard American methods. Your hard answer and what follows just avoid the question.

 

Helene's answer makes perfect sense, not having a weak notrump opening in your minor suit openings does make inverted minors easier.

Sure my easy answer was tongue in check.

 

My hard answer wasn't intended to avoid the question.

 

When I think of my system I don't think of the specific advantages of any particular bid but how they all fit together.

 

These are some of the advantages I think of in a weak 1NT opening (I'm not sure if these are all problems that are solved).

 

1. Pre-emptive - its hard to defend against. Harder initially than a 1-level suit opening. This also has a downside with it being harder for our side to get to its fit or best contract in part-score auctions. This is easier after a natural one-level suit opening. Some of this is given back if a strong no trumper plays five-card majors and therefore one or both minors are not made in a real suit. This problem for the opponents is bigger over a weak NT than a strong NT because a weak NT is more frequent and the opponents will have game more often against a weak NT.

 

2. (Related to Helene's). We are more likely to have a slam opposite a strong no trump hand. Therefore there is a significant advantage in bidding our suits early. This is true especially if we belong in a minor. Inverted minors can help that when we have an immediate fit. But even those come with a cost of not having a simple minor suit raise. We recently added inverted minors but our rational for doing that was primarily that it made our constructive auctions more easily fit the available bidding space.

 

3. When opener starts with a suit they will always have either extra distribution or extra strength. This makes some auctions easier especially in competition. 1♣ (2♠) ?

 

We are much more free to act knowing partner will have extras (high card or distributional) where as a strong no trumper needs to be cautious as he will fear that he is facing a weak no trump possibly with significant values wasted in spades. This is compounded when the opening may not even be a real suit. Also this in turn possibly puts more pressure on opener when the bidding is passed back to him.

 

4. Related to 3. above the weak 1NT opening limits opener's hand very quickly with the most common hand type.

 

5. The final contract will often be 1NT which on this unrevealing auction will be hard to defend against. The strong NTers will have bid at least one and frequently two suits before getting to 1NT which aid will often aid the defense.

 

There is bound to be others that i have not thought of at this moment.

 

I am not so naive that I think there are no costs associated with these advantages and the weak NT in general and I could certainly make a list of disadvantages but I was just listing some of the advantages here.

[jtfanclub]

2♣ promising one more bid creates problems. Not saying that it's bad since it obviously solves some problems also. But if responder has a 3325 9-count he cannot respond 1NT since opener would pass 1NT with a balanced 16-count. Yet responder needs at least 11 points to bid again over 2♦, considering the 3451 11-count opener might have.

going way back....

 

If the worst part of ACOL is that you end up in 1NT on rare occassions with 16 across 9, I'm surprised it hasn't taken the world by storm. Must be a Yankee conspiracy.

 

(I think it's completely playable to have the 2 club response to 1 diamond be forcing to 2NT, while having all other 2/1 bids not promise a rebid)

[zasanya]

OK, give me an example of a problem that the weak notrump solves.

After an inverted minor raise, if 2N is NF you would like to do something else with 14, but 3N should show 18-19 (or not?). Having only one range for balanced hands that open one of a suit makes those things easier. I know you and Arend solve this problem by playing 14-16, but that means you have to rebid 2N with 17.

 

Also when considering a negative double you don't have to worry about opener having a weak notrump.

Agree with these, too - inverted minors are oh-so-simple playing weak NT, and it prevents the holding of a minimum 33(43) after 1m (2suit) X.

 

At this rate, I might find myself switching to weak NT...oh, wait, all these problems are solved by Polish Club too B)

Yeah. I find polish ♣ better than most other systems excluding acol and precision ♣. ;)

[zasanya]

A great advantage of acol imo is lead indication.When acol player opens 1 minor

and opponnts buy the contract with responder on lead he knows opener has 5 cards in the minor or extra values . It is a significant advantage imo as most dubious contracts are made or lost due to opening lead.(again imo).

[Wackojack]

[hv=d=e&n=s10872hj3dq10cakq65&w=sk964hak8dak76c73&e=sh10542dj9432cj842&s=saqj53hq976d85c109]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]Kibbing an Acol pair playing in a team match against 2 stars playing a 5 card major system, this hand interested me. The bidding went:

- - p p

1♠ 2♣ p 2nt

p p p

 

Our stone age Acol pair stole the opening ♠ bid and prevented the star opps from finding the part score in ♠ their way. You may comment that south's bid of 2nt was reckless. Nevertheless, even 2♣ will go 1 off. At the other table West (not playing Acol) opened 1nt and NS found their ♠ partial when South overcalled 2♣ for the majors. 2nt duly went 2 off btw.

 

Just another advantage of Acol? You may say that west's opening bid of 1♠ could just as easily help NS to a makeable 3nt contract when an 8 card fit in 4♠ would go down. Had I reported that scenario instead, arguing the inferiority of Acol, no doubt the Acol bashers would have been nodding sagely.

 

FWIIW I prefer playing 2/1 to Acol, but I am acutely aware when I play f2f team games against Acol players that there are hands (maybe not many) where the Acol system gives better results.

[helene_t]

Agree with your concluding remark, Jack, but not sure if I would consider this hand a prime example. By all vuln it would be quite likely that 1♠ was passed out, which is one of the reasons why I don't always open 1♠ with this hand, although I know the system prescribes it.

[NickRW]

Interesting thread.

 

For what it is worth this is what I prefer.

 

1) For a regular partnership, bundle strong 4441s into the multi. This is the old treatment. It won't work for pick up partnerships as it seems that bundling a strong minor hand into the multi is more popular (less strain on the memory cells probably)

 

2) For other 15+ 4441, I usually pick the major, hearts with both and plan to rebid in NT if partner bids the shortage.

 

3) For those in the 12-14 range it's

4414 open 1C

4144 probably 1D, but I might pick 1C if the suit is weak to inhibit the lead in case we end up in NT.

1444 and 4441 with single A or K, open 1N

other 1444, prefer 1D as I like 1H-1S-2C to show 5 hearts

other 4441 1H.

 

4) Weak, borderline 4441s can always be passed. Reese wrote that 4441 is a defensive shape and I tend to agree - with a singleton in your hand someone else will probably open and you may get a good chance to speak up later - or conceal your holding as the case may be.

 

In answer to Han, the main advantage of the weak NT definitely is that these weak NT hands aren't opened anything else. Sounds silly, but it means that all 1 openings are either 15+ or unbal. In particular 1S is always 5+ cards or 15+ assuming you never open 4441 shape 1S when in the 12-14 zone. Also 1H is rarely not 5. So you get a lot of the benefit of 5 card majors without the downside.

 

In answer to the 1D-2C-2D thing - most ordinary folk are playing MP pairs in the UK - playing limit bids and pretty much everything not forcing is playable at that form of scoring as the odd missed slam is not a disaster - and the benefit is that you don't get other disasters when people disagree over whether a certain sequence is or is not forcing. For those that play teams or butler/cross imp scored pairs (actually not very common here), then this treatment obviously becomes harder to justify.

 

Nick